The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's impugned order, which had erroneously directed the Board to take over employees from the ATM and Cash Management Division of Respondent No.2 under the garb of interpreting the Scheme of Arrangement. The Scheme was fully implemented in 2011 with the knowledge of Respondent No.1 union, and multiple wage settlements were entered into without objections. Respondent No.1's application seeking modification of the Scheme's express terms was impermissible and barred by limitation. Only the ATM and Cash Management businesses were transferred, not all employees of the Transferor Company. Interpreting the Scheme to mean all employees stood transferred to the Appellant on the Effective Date was impractical and inconceivable.
The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's impugned order, which had erroneously directed the Board to take over employees from the ATM and Cash Management Division of Respondent No.2 under the garb of interpreting the Scheme of Arrangement. The Scheme was fully implemented in 2011 with the knowledge of Respondent No.1 union, and multiple wage settlements were entered into without objections. Respondent No.1's application seeking modification of the Scheme's express terms was impermissible and barred by limitation. Only the ATM and Cash Management businesses were transferred, not all employees of the Transferor Company. Interpreting the Scheme to mean all employees stood transferred to the Appellant on the Effective Date was impractical and inconceivable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
